Dawn's my favorite out of the three; I think it's the most developed in terms of character and theme. Night is great, too, but Day, which I like, feels like a retread of the same ground covered in Night and Dawn, and one that fails to do what the first two did so well or add anything interesting. I also think that while Day is more technically proficient than it's predecessors -- it boasts a stylistically slicker look and more convincing special effects -- I think the scenario and the characters are patently unconvincing, and fairly unlikable. Also, while the first two have their moments of gore, Romero never focuses on the blood and guts. The point of Day, on the other hand, seems to be the blood and guts.

All that said, Day has some good moments, and was, upon its first release, one of only a few horror movies that took itself seriously in a time when horror had turned into bloody comedies._________________"If you're talking about censorship, and what things should be shown and what things shouldn't be shown, I've said that as an artist you have no social responsibility whatsoever."

Anyone care to discuss how they feel about the upcoming Dawn of the Dead remake? Personally, next to The Texas Chainsaw Massacre remake, I think this is the worst idea to come about in years, and that's even taking into consideration Bad Boys II. Even if it turns out to be a good movie, what's the point? What can it possibly offer? Whereas remakes like Carpenter's The Thing and Cronenberg's The Fly diverge enough from the original to validate their existence, Dawn of the Dead, it seems to me, can only shamble mindlessly in the well-worn tracks of Romero's original trilogy. If Hollywood really thought that a Romero-style zombie apocalypse flick could make money, why not just give the budget to the man himself for another instalment of his Dead series? (Michael, I know you've gotta have an opinion on this one.)_________________"If you're talking about censorship, and what things should be shown and what things shouldn't be shown, I've said that as an artist you have no social responsibility whatsoever."

Yeah, for all my griping, I'll be checking it out; that is, unless the trailers look anything like House of the Dead._________________"If you're talking about censorship, and what things should be shown and what things shouldn't be shown, I've said that as an artist you have no social responsibility whatsoever."

Speak of the devil. Click here for the trailer for the Dawn remake. I was not exactly blown away by it, but it's suck level doesn't look too high at this point._________________"If you're talking about censorship, and what things should be shown and what things shouldn't be shown, I've said that as an artist you have no social responsibility whatsoever."

I just saw Night for the first time last night. I found it very interesting in that it was a "monster" movie that was more about the people than the "monsters". With it's small number of core characters and locations it almost seemed to be written like a play...

For someone who may have done some analysis or thinking about the film, did the newsreel sequences make the fight against the zombies seem like a Vietnam war metaphor/criticism/satire to anyone else? Maybe it was just the look & feel of a 60's news broadcast from a "battle zone" that gave me that impression and there's no deeper meaning to it...

I just saw Night for the first time last night. I found it very interesting in that it was a "monster" movie that was more about the people than the "monsters". With it's small number of core characters and locations it almost seemed to be written like a play...

Thats one of the reasons why I liked the film, a bit of Hitchcock style.

And it got straight into it, no mucking around, no story building.

I havent seen the extra 15 mins footage, Im guessing that will be

all the gore scenes. Anyone seen the extra footage.

I still havent seen the remake, might hire that this weekend.

Speaking of George Romero, I saw Bruiser last night,

it was better than I thought. More gore than I expected.

anyone else seen it?_________________walking on air, up from the wheelchair,

I was a bit disappointed in Bruiser. I had high expectations because it was a new Romero, but while the concept was interesting, it seems to kind of stagger forward, and completely falls apart by the ending.

The NOTLD 30th Anniversery Edition is a waste of time. John Russo filmed two extra scenes on digital video, one that preceeds the movie proper detailing the internment of the first ghoul that attacks Barbara, and a coda about a priest who zombies-out on a reporter. Both are badly written, acted, and flimed, and completely worthless. Newly filmed footage of zombies roaming about works a bit better, but, again, adds nothing. And a new score replaces the original, which is okay in and of itself, but doesn't flow very well with the movie. Maybe it's worth seeing for curiosity's sake, but I'd warn anyone who hasn't yet seen NOTLD to take care not to pick this one up by accident._________________"If you're talking about censorship, and what things should be shown and what things shouldn't be shown, I've said that as an artist you have no social responsibility whatsoever."

Oh, and the Tom Savini-directed remaked of NOTLD is okay. It's sort of dramatically flat, in my opinion, and the lead actress who plays Barbara is singularly awful. The rest of the cast (especially Tony "Candyman" Todd) deliver respectable performances, and the movie is not without some good points. It certainly doesn't replace the original, though._________________"If you're talking about censorship, and what things should be shown and what things shouldn't be shown, I've said that as an artist you have no social responsibility whatsoever."